Reflections on meaning and truth

Vis ad omnia: free energy

We live in a time where meaningful use of energy seems limited by natural resources. The scarcity of natural resources asks for its equal management. While capitalism, defined by rightful possession of means of production and thus possession of natural resources, is commonly accepted and desired by society as an equitable system, the rights of property are decided by inheritance, money and further contractual prerogatives. This way, the provision of energy, a fundamental requirement for prosperity and fulfilment, is a fertile business model. Everything, any economic sector, depends strongly on energy. Big money and power is involved: Those who control whole energy supply chains control the whole economy. From that point-of-view, it is certainly understandable that the will for centralization of energy business is asking for strong market distortion trough monopolist and cartel structures. The thereby gained power is self-preserving: The more centralized the whole business, the more likely assured is its preservation. It is somewhat ingenuous when underestimating the current circumstances in terms of big centralized energy providers who actually do not only possess and control resources (land, natives, mines, distribution, etc), but politicians, journalists, academics or even whole private armies. Those providers actually got enough monetary and influential power in order to maintain and keep growing their empire.

My intentions aren’t merely about inappropriateness of political or economical systems such as capitalism, but introducing the basics about how few companies benefit from the scarcity of resources, in particular of energetically useful resources. It is in their interest 1) to maintain the scarcity of natural resources in order to keep them valuable, 2) to assure the social and legal rights for those resources in order to have founded justification when ethical challenges happen, 3) to manage the depletion of those resources and to control the emerging technologies in order to keep the edge on the market. It is part of their business strategy, the strategy to fight against any oppressor, the whole success of the company and its influential shareholders depends on it. Fortunately, the oppressors are rarely the depending consumer: when some environmentalists have concern, technology (eco-efficiency) can be altered, when some socialists have concern, worker conditions can be (slightly) improved, if some hippies have concern (i.e. free energy advocates), the intellectuals can be bought, and if some leaders have concern, war can lastly be waged. Summarizing, because of scarcity, the current state remains economically interesting, and decentralized, freely or at least easily, available energy would be antithetical.

Free energy will promulgate a forward leap in human progress akin to the discovery of fire. It will bring the dawn of an entirely new civilization ― one based on freedom and abundance. ― Sterling D. Allan

Interestingly, in those days of high technology, revolutionizing and never-seen ways of engineering, alternative solutions for power provision seem to be strongly limited and somehow inefficient (grey energy, availability). For the scientific community, the deviant possibilities are not only greatly limited, but truthfully implausible. Because of the laws of thermodynamics and the sun being the sole substantial source of energy besides gravitational forces (yes, all kind of energy on earth happen to be a transformation product of solar energy), no other sort of energy tapping is allowed by scientific standards, and thus conformity prohibits esoteric alternatives.

This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is
inherently of no value to us. ― Western Union internal memo (1876)

This leads to the consideration of free energy and devices exploiting those seemly free sources. Before swinging the mace named conservation of energy, why could there not be something science currently doesn’t know: Is science really that advanced to confirm its authenticity? No perpetuum mobile is necessary in order to explain the use of yet unknown power. The following theories, devices and ideas should represent a good introduction into the highly interesting topic of free energy. Even if I affirm that many stories and concepts seem to improbable to the untrained eye, why should we outlaw in a dogmatic manner (religious science) when the potential benefits largely outweighs the effort some engineers have to put in? The benefits being nothing but comfort and fulfilment, as well the disempowerment of eager-for-war people and thus rudimentary peace.

The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence. ― Nikola Tesla

Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through― equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ― Nikola Tesla

Some examples:

– Cold fusion: Based on an experiment of Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann in 1989 achieving a kind of nuclear reaction at room temperature. Being discredited for their claims, the subject remained across the wide web and seems to gain in interest. [Student Guide to Cold Fusion]

– Tesla technology: Tesla, inventor of alternative current technology, appears to have had knowledge of more powerful technology. His main drive is known to have been his commitment to universal energy distribution.